A novel mini-DNA barcoding assay to identify processed fins from internationally protected shark species

PLoS ONE

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2015, Pages

  Fields, Andrew T ^a   Abercrombie, Debra L ^b   Eng, Rowena ^a   Feldheim, Kevin ^c   Chapman, Demian D ^a  

^a STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Abercrombie and Fish ^*  (United States)

^c FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYTOCHROME OXIDASE I GENE; DNA BARCODING; DNA DEGRADATION; DNA SEQUENCE; FIN (ORGAN); GENE; GENE SEQUENCE; GENETIC DISTANCE; NONHUMAN; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; SHARK; SPECIES DIVERSITY; SPECIES IDENTIFICATION; ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; ANIMAL; CLASSIFICATION; ENDANGERED SPECIES; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FOOD HANDLING; GENETICS; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; PROCEDURES;

CARCHARHINUS LONGIMANUS; CARCHARODON CARCHARIAS; CETACEA; CETORHINUS MAXIMUS; CHONDRICHTHYES; LAMNA NASUS; LAMNIDAE; RHINCODON TYPUS; SPHYRNA LEWINI; SPHYRNA MOKARRAN; SPHYRNA ZYGAENA;

ANIMAL FINS; ANIMALS; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; DNA BARCODING, TAXONOMIC; ENDANGERED SPECIES; FOOD HANDLING; INTERNATIONALITY; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; SHARKS;

EID: 84922352039     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0114844     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Vannuccini SF, Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (1999) Shark utilization, marketing, and trade. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. PMID: 25506965
2. Clarke SC, Magnussen JE, Abercrombie DL, McAllister MK, Shivji MS (2006) Identification of shark species composition and proportion in the Hong Kong shark fin market based on molecular genetics and trade records. Conservation Biology 20: 201-211. PMID: 16909673
3. Dulvy NK, Baum JK, Clarke S, Compagno LJV, Cortés E, et al. (2008) You can swim but you can't hide: the global status and conservation of oceanic pelagic sharks and rays. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 18: 459-482.
4. Ferretti F, Worm B, Britten GL, Heithaus MR, Lotze HK (2010) Patterns and ecosystem consequences of shark declines in the ocean. Ecology Letters 13: 1055-1071. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01489. x PMID: 20528897
5. Worm B, Davis B, Kettemer L, Ward-Paige CA, Chapman D, et al. (2013) Global catches, exploitation rates, and rebuilding options for sharks. Marine Policy 40: 194-204.
6. Shivji M, Clarke S, Pank M, Natanson L, Kohler N, et al. (2002) Genetic Identification of Pelagic Shark Body Parts for Conservation and Trade Monitoring. Conservation Biology 16: 1036-1047.
7. Chapman D, Abercrombie D, Douady C, Pikitch E, Stanhopen M, et al. (2003) A streamlined, biorganelle, multiplex PCR approach to species identification: Application to global conservation and trade monitoring of the great white shark, Carcharodon carcharias. Conservation Genetics 4: 415-425.
8. Abercrombie D, Clarke S, Shivji M (2005) Global-scale genetic identification of hammerhead sharks: Application to assessment of the international fin trade and law enforcement. Conservation Genetics 6: 775-788.
9. Wong EHK, Shivji MS, Hanner RH (2009) Identifying sharks with DNA barcodes: assessing the utility of a nucleotide diagnostic approach. Molecular Ecology Resources 9: 243-256. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02653.x PMID: 21564984
10. Dawnay N, Ogden R, McEwing R, Carvalho GR, Thorpe RS (2007) Validation of the barcoding gene COI for use in forensic genetic species identification. Forensic Science International 173: 1-6. PMID: 17300895
11. Nicholas KB, Nicholas HB (1997) GeneDoc: analysis and visualization of genetic variation. EMBNEW. NEWS 4:14. http://www.nrbsc.org/gfx/genedoc.
12. Ward RD, Zemlak TS, Innes BH, Last PR, Hebert PDN (2005) DNA barcoding Australia's fish species. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 360: 1847-1857. PMID: 16214743
13. Lowenstein JH, Amato G, Kolokotronis S-O (2009) The real maccoyii: identifying tuna sushi with DNA Barcodes-contrasting characteristic attributes and genetic distances. PLoS ONE 4: e7866. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007866 PMID: 19924239
14. Naylor GJP, Caira JN, Jensen K, Rosana KAM, White WT, et al. (2012) A DNA sequence-based approach to the identification of shark and ray species and its implications for global elasmobranch diversity and parasitology. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History: 1-26220.
15. Hall TA (1999) BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucl. Acids. Symp. Ser. 41:95-98.21.
16. Bridge PD, Spooner BM, Roberts PJ, Panchal G (2003) On the unreliability of published DNA sequences. New Phytol. 160:43-48
17. Vilgalys R (2003) Taxonomic misidentifications in public DNA databases. New Phytol. 160:4-5.
18. Wesche PL, Gaffney DJ, Keightley PD (2004) DNA sequence error rates in GenBank records estimated using the mouse genome as a reference. DNA Seq. 15:362-364. PMID: 15621661
19. Naylor GJP, Caira JN, Jensen K, Rosana KAM, Straube N, et al. (2012) Elasmobranch Phylogeny: A Mitochondrial Estimate Based on 595 Species. In: Carrier JC, Musick JA, Heithaus MR (eds) Biology of Sharks and their Relatives, Edition 2. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida: 31-56 doi: 10.1007/s12262-012-0597-2 PMID: 24799781
20. Abercrombie DL, Chapman DD, Gulak SJB, Carlson JK (2013) Visual identification of fins from common elasmobranchs in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean. NMFS-SEFSC- 643, 51 p.